Path: rambo.bobo.net!xs4all!xs4all!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!newsfeed.concentric.net!207.155.183.80.MISMATCH!global-news-master
From: inFormer@informer.org (Rev Dennis Erlich)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: A lecture on sanity--I think someone needs it!
Date: 07 Nov 1998 19:16:32 PST
Organization: inFormer Ministry [a 501(c)3 non-profit, religious organization] "... in service of cult victims and their families."
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <364c0f1d.35528103@news.concentric.net>
References: <3645cfef.878969@news.tiac.net> <3645da6b.18385828@cnews.newsguy.com>
Reply-To: informer@informer.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: ts024d08.lax-ca.concentric.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451
X-No-Archive: yes
Xref: rambo.bobo.net alt.religion.scientology:141115
fast@anywhere.usa (Fast):
minton's account lectures us
>>You can make an arbitrary division among people who lack perfect sanity.
fast
>I think that this definition of sanity, always choosing correctly, is
>a bit limiting. It seems to imply that decisions can be judged by
>some absolute, external standard.
Yes, and that is precisely the danger of scienotek.
>There needs to be room for people
>to have different values and individual situations without being
>considered insane.
Or being labeled DB, downtone, or couch-potatoes.
>It also seems dehumanizing to just classify others as insane so
>easily.
This is a back to scienobabble definition of sanity.
>>Some people ...
... like to put people in categories.
>I actually agree with most of the rest of your post. There is
>probably something to it.
So who actually invented positive thinking? Elrong, Damian or was
it the Bob?
Rev Dennis Erlich * * the inFormer * *